FdL: Letter to Editor

Deeper look at issue tells different story Amid the coverage of the stem cell debate (The Reporter, July 30) was an striking sentence: "Only embryonic stem cells, which have the capacity to become any kind of human tissue, have the potential to repair vital organs." A deeper look into research and applications underscores the fact that embryonic stem cell (ESC) research is a false hope propagated by questionable scientific, media and pro-abortion hype. If, as the stories suggested, ESC shows more promise than adult stem cells (ASC), why are there currently dozens of clinical trials going on using adult stem cells, but not a single one using embryonic stem cells? While ESC researchers are plagued by the continued formation of tumors in tissue treated with these cells, Dr. David Prentice of the Family Research Council has listed 72 diseases that are now being used to treated or cured through the use of ASC or umbilical cord blood. In a much-ballyhooed letter appearing in Science Magazine just before President Bush vetoed an ESC bill, three leading ESC supporters challenged Prentice's findings. The authors stated ASC "treatments fully tested in all required phases of clinical trials and approved by the U.S Food and Drug Administration are available to treat only nine of the conditions" on his list. This is inaccurate. But left unchallenged, it is still nine more than ESC research can claim. In addition, there are 1,175 clinical trials for ASC research, compared to zero for ESC research. Thomas Jefferson wrote: "To compel a man to furnish contributions of money for the propagation of opinions which he disbelieves and abhors is sinful and tyrannical." A fertilized human egg on its natural path will become a baby. Destroying it in the name of possibly saving another life is wrong. Asking taxpayers to pay for that death is abhorrent. Steve Fountain Fond du Lac